↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of two health education interventions to improve the varicella vaccination: a randomized controlled trial from a province in the east China

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evaluation of two health education interventions to improve the varicella vaccination: a randomized controlled trial from a province in the east China
Published in
BMC Public Health, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5070-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yu Hu, Qian Li, Yaping Chen

Abstract

We evaluated the effect of two Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)-based health educational interventions on varicella vaccine (VarV) vaccination among pregnant women in a province in the east China. A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted among 200 pregnant women with ≥12 gestation weeks to test two interventions, including a messaging video and a messaging booklet. The participants were randomly assigned into the control group, the video group or the booklet group. The VarV coverage at 12 and 24 months old was compared among the children of the three groups and relative risks (RRs) were calculated, by using the coverage of the control group as reference. The timeliness of VarV was also assessed. Furthermore, differences in the effects on the knowledge and attitude of VarV vaccination between the two interventions was evaluated. The VarV coverage of their children by 24 months of age was 86.4%, 76.1% and 56.7% for the video group, the booklet group and the control group, respectively. The relative risks (RRs) for the coverage of VarV at 24 months of age were 4.8 (95% CI: 2.06-11.3) for the video group and 2.4 (95% CI: 1.2-5.1) for the booklet group. The means of delays were 57.3 days in the video group, 76.9 days in the booklet group, and 100.6 days in the control group. The proportion of women who intended to vaccinate their children with VarV was higher in the video group than the booklet group (93.9% vs. 82.1%, p < 0.05). Our findings indicated that perinatal health education through booklet or video could improve the coverage and schedule adherence for children's VarV vaccination.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 95 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Student > Postgraduate 5 5%
Other 4 4%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 41 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 14%
Psychology 7 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 3%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 42 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 January 2018.
All research outputs
#5,807,468
of 23,016,919 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#5,796
of 14,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,746
of 442,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#141
of 243 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,016,919 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,994 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 442,088 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 243 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.